Maximize the volume without using Lagrange multipliers


by s3a
Tags: lagrange, maximize, multipliers, volume
s3a
s3a is offline
#1
Feb28-12, 09:01 AM
P: 524
1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
When a rectangular box is sent through the mail, the post office demands that the length of the box plus twice the sum of its height and width be no more than 250 centimeters. Find the dimensions of the box satisfying this requirement that encloses the largest possible volume. (Solve this problem without using Lagrange multipliers.)


2. Relevant equations
Partial differentiation and equations of constraint for each variable.


3. The attempt at a solution
My attempt at a solution is attached however, given that I got length = l = 0 (even though I get a nonzero width and height) which gives a volume of 0, I'd say I did something wrong and I don't have the solutions or answer for this particular problem so I can't check what's wrong.
Attached Thumbnails
MyWork.jpg  
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
SensaBubble: It's a bubble, but not as we know it (w/ video)
The hemihelix: Scientists discover a new shape using rubber bands (w/ video)
Microbes provide insights into evolution of human language
lanedance
lanedance is offline
#2
Feb28-12, 09:51 AM
HW Helper
P: 3,309
did you just equate the volume with zero? shouldn't you differentiate to maximise the volume and find where the derivative is zero?
SammyS
SammyS is offline
#3
Feb28-12, 09:52 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 7,419
Quote Quote by s3a View Post
1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
When a rectangular box is sent through the mail, the post office demands that the length of the box plus twice the sum of its height and width be no more than 250 centimeters. Find the dimensions of the box satisfying this requirement that encloses the largest possible volume. (Solve this problem without using Lagrange multipliers.)

2. Relevant equations
Partial differentiation and equations of constraint for each variable.

3. The attempt at a solution
My attempt at a solution is attached however, given that I got length = l = 0 (even though I get a nonzero width and height) which gives a volume of 0, I'd say I did something wrong and I don't have the solutions or answer for this particular problem so I can't check what's wrong.


(Your solution is correct for the minimum volume.)

Once you have w = h, put that back into the volume formula so V is only a function of w or h .

Maximize that.

s3a
s3a is offline
#4
Mar1-12, 01:02 PM
P: 524

Maximize the volume without using Lagrange multipliers


lanedance, no that's not what I did. I did differentiate (partially) hence the subscripts. ;)

SammyS, it makes sense that I got the minimum :) (thanks for mentioning it though because I initially thought I was doing something redundant rather than getting a minimum). What you said sounds like what I did though. Could you please be a bit more descriptive algorithmically?
SammyS
SammyS is offline
#5
Mar1-12, 07:00 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 7,419
Quote Quote by s3a View Post
SammyS, it makes sense that I got the minimum :) (thanks for mentioning it though because I initially thought I was doing something redundant rather than getting a minimum). What you said sounds like what I did though. Could you please be a bit more descriptive algorithmically?
[itex]\displaystyle V=\ell hw[/itex]

If h = w , then = 250 - 4h ,

and [itex]\displaystyle V=(250 - 4h)h^2\,.[/itex]

Maximize that.
s3a
s3a is offline
#6
Mar1-12, 09:01 PM
P: 524
In the attachment above, I already have

V = 250w^2 - 4w^3

which is basically what you said with w instead of h which is okay since w = h.

As for maximizing that, do you mean taking dV/dw = 0 and solving for w?
SammyS
SammyS is offline
#7
Mar1-12, 09:56 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 7,419
Quote Quote by s3a View Post
In the attachment above, I already have

V = 250w^2 - 4w^3

which is basically what you said with w instead of h which is okay since w = h.

As for maximizing that, do you mean taking dV/dw = 0 and solving for w?
That's the usual way.

Try it.
s3a
s3a is offline
#8
Mar1-12, 11:51 PM
P: 524
Is this what you meant?

(By the way, I choose to reject w = 0 since it yields a minimum.)
Attached Thumbnails
MyWork.jpg  


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Lagrange Multipliers Calculus & Beyond Homework 4
Lagrange Multipliers HELP PLEASE Calculus & Beyond Homework 6
Lagrange Multipliers, calc max volume of box Calculus & Beyond Homework 1
LaGrange Multipliers!! Help! Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
Help with Lagrange multipliers Calculus 10